Butt shots - yes or no?

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

lukemeup

lukemeup

Well-known member
Member's gallery
I've been practicing photographing smaller birds recently and some of my results are... from behind. :) Are these decent in your opinion or should I avoid them in the future?

butt-3.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
butt-2.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
butt-1.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.



Little warblers are fast as they hop and jump in dense foliage.
 
Member's gallery
What Jeff said! (Love the “glamour shot” 😂) So then it’s a question of the framing…as it is for front on shots. for me shots 1 and 3 work with the background/foreground, 2 not so much
 
I like number one. To my eye I'd cut it exactly in half to end up with about a 3:4 or 4:5 portrait shot. The branch in the background and the rest of the perch don't add to the story. But the colors and curves above the head are sweet and could be emphasized.
 
Member's gallery
Although 'butt shots' can be quite effective I try to avoid them because it suggests the bird is thinking of leaving. This isn't necessarily a problem but in some cases it's because the bird is trying to get away from the photographer, i.e., is uncomfortable with the photographer.
 
Member's gallery
Funny enough - I came across the very same species of both the warbler and the flycatcher in a completely different location during my afternoon walk today. This time they gave me opportunity for non 'from behind' photos.

monday-1.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
monday-2.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
I often use rear photos to confirm an ID or because it shows something dramatic -- like the Brown Thrasher headshot I use as my profile photo. The rear perspective shows primary projection, rump color, tail length, nape plumage, and sometimes undertail coverts -- all interesting field marks.
 
Member's gallery
jeffnles1 said:
Nothing wrong with the “glamour shot” looking back over the shoulder. They pose tends to work well with human models.
Click to expand...
Totally agree with this. As long as the bird head is turned enough to the viewer and you can see it's eyes, these kinda of shots work great. Especially since many birds have different colors on their back and belly.
 
Member's gallery
Regardless of body angle the general rule of thumb is that the critter should be looking towards the camera or at least in profile(i.e. 90 degrees). Actually for birds the dorsal feathers are typically the most attractive so the view of the back with look back across the shoulder is my favorite position for many birds. But as the saying goes rules are made to be broken. Some shots just work. With that in mind IMO in the second shot above the bird is looking too far away from the camera and there's no other compelling aspect of the image to make it interesting.
 
Member's gallery
Tails and rear end are part of the animals, and from my experience with deer they often turns that end towards you (leaving). But when getting a turned head so you get an eye with it it can be interesting and for many birds even more colorful. So keep going
 
Member's gallery
NorthernFocus said:
Regardless of body angle the general rule of thumb is that the critter should be looking towards the camera or at least in profile(i.e. 90 degrees). Actually for birds the dorsal feathers are typically the most attractive so the view of the back with look back across the shoulder is my favorite position for many birds. But as the saying goes rules are made to be broken. Some shots just work. With that in mind IMO in the second shot above the bird is looking too far away from the camera and there's no other compelling aspect of the image to make it interesting.
Click to expand...
This is my perspective as well. Normally the head being turned away even 1 degree is enough to put an image in the reject bin. The body can be turned at an angle while still having the head even to toward the camera slightly. Occasionally a rear view works, but don't think of it as acceptable because it's the only shot you got. Exceptions would represent 1% of your images - not 20% or more.

I also agree with Andrew - for identification having a range of positions can be useful and the view from the rear is important. For proof, practice, or other reasons you might make an image with the subject facing away and it might be all you can get.

The same is generally true for mammals and other subjects - you want them slightly toward the camera - usually with eye contact and a catchlight if possible.
 
Member's gallery
Leaning toward nay. I'm not an expert or a professional, but to my eye a butt shot of a bird has no engagement with the viewer, especially if the head is turned away from the camera. I delete those photos and consciously trained myself to not take those types of shots. If I get a butt shot and the birds head is looking toward the camera (90 degrees to the lens) or slightly angled IN, and not AWAY from the camera, I will consider keeping it. Photos where the birds head is turned away from the camera, even front shots, are awkward to me and never see the light of day.
 
Member's gallery
lukemeup said:
I've been practicing photographing smaller birds recently and some of my results are... from behind. :) Are these decent in your opinion or should I avoid them in the future?
Click to expand...
Yes avoid them whenever possible -- but take anything of a new bird/species - then move to have the wind behind you. Birds take off and land into the wind and unless there is a good reason they cannot - e.g. due to branches or other obstructions. They also try to perch facing into the wind.
HOWEVER -- some shots - birds like Cormorants or certain owls or kingfishers with their wings wide open can be startlingly good from the rear. But -- please no "A#SE" shots - not a good look at all.
BIF wings up always from forward of the centre line with the bird flying towards you not away - eyes, bill, talons, prey/twig, etc... head position, interactions etc....
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
If you are not affiliated with an organization, such as Photographic Society of America who teaches no "behind" shots ever, and the bird is looking toward you or even looking to the side in profile I cannot see any reason not to take the shot. Perhaps it won't be something someone else will print but if you like it and it's a nice representation of the bird, i.e., sharp, well-composed, good color, etc. it's fine. Getting too strict with these things takes away from creativity in general. If you are shooting, however, for a specific purpose where you have been told "no butt shots," then take no butt shots. There is a famous photographer who gets a minimum of $100,000 per print and one of his most famous prints is of a polar bear walking away, a butt shot, with only one back paw up and that paw is the only color in the shot...it's a beautiful image and people pay the asking price. I don't get too hung up on what other photographers say as I shoot for me and I've won many awards in juried competitions doing just that, shooting what I like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top